Random man confirmed by Senate to lead world’s greatest military

posted at 6:41 pm on February 26, 2013 by Allahpundit

He’s not random, though. A truly random man wouldn’t have earned the sturdy liberal support that Hagel’s Israel-focused Jew-baiting and left-of-Obama foreign policy brought him. In the end, despite weeks of dirt being dug up, not a single Democrat voted against him at any stage of the process. (That’s not including Reid’s no vote last week, as that was purely procedural.)

Which is not to say he’s a bad guy. It may be, as Chuck Schumer believes, that he’s just … slow. Congrats, America.

I, for one, look forward to the brilliant Hagel running herd over the most complex budgeting challenges ever to face the Pentagon.

The final vote: 58-41, which is a bit closer than the 71-27 margin on cloture earlier today. There are 15 Republicans who think voters are too dumb to realize that the cloture vote is the one that assured Hagel’s confirmation and that, by voting yes on that and no on the meaningless final vote, they can pretend that they “opposed” Hagel. And in fairness, they’re probably right; most voters likely are that dumb. But let’s name those 15 anyway:

The usual reason to vote yes on cloture and no on the final vote is out of deference to the president’s right, within limits, to pick the cabinet he wants. You don’t filibuster a guy just because his policy preferences tilt liberal; I wouldn’t even filibuster him for his musings on Israel, as objectionable as they are. If Obama wants a SecDef who thinks that way, that’s what America gets for reelecting him. Where the filibuster comes in is when the nominee simply isn’t qualified to do the job for which he’s been nominated. I can’t believe a single one of those 15, let alone the scores of Democrats who voted for this guy, seriously believes he’s prepared to run the Defense Department. They’re sticking the military with someone who, at best, will be an empty Republican suit while advisors who know what they’re doing, like Michele Flournoy, make the hard decisions. The next time McCain and Graham pound the table about defense cuts or O’s foreign policy, remember that they both voted to send Chuck Hagel on to the final vote. That’s how serious they are.

As for Republicans voting yes, there were four: Cochran, Johanns, Shelby, and … Rand Paul, who voted no twice on cloture. That’s the most bizarre vote array on a nominee I could imagine. You could vote yes on cloture and on confirmation if you thought Hagel was a meritorious nominee. You could vote no on both if you thought he wasn’t qualified. You could vote yes on cloture and no on confirmation if you thought Obama deserved enough deference as president to have his nominee face a final up-or-down vote. You could vote no on cloture and yes on the final vote, as Rand Paul did, if … why? Here’s Paul’s reasoning:

“I voted no because I wanted more information and I think that part of what the Senate does is try to get information about the nominees,” Paul told reporters in the basement of the Capitol after Hagel’s confirmation Tuesday. “I’ve said all along that I give the president some prerogative in choosing his political appointees.”

“There are many things I disagree with Chuck Hagel on, there are many things I disagree with John Kerry on, there are very few things I agree with the president on, but the president gets to choose political appointees,” Paul said.

Asked if he ever got the information he wanted about Hagel, Paul said that he hadn’t.

If “the president gets to choose political appointees” is sufficient reason to vote yes, then (a) we should get rid of the Senate’s advise-and-consent responsibility and (b) at the very least we should not be filibustering nominees, as Rand Paul voted to do twice. Even if he did that purely to squeeze the White House for more information, why would he vote yes on the final vote when they never gave him that information? And if the president’s entitled to his nominee of choice, why would Paul demand more info about Hagel in the first place? Just rubber-stamp him. Vote yes on every vote, no questions asked.

If you want to know the real reason Paul voted yes, read this. He overplayed his hand earlier today by voting no on cloture; he’s trying to walk a line between mainstream conservatives and his dad’s supporters and casting two votes for filibustering Hagel was, at a minimum, one too many for the latter group. So he did to the libertarians what McCain and Graham tried to do to conservatives — he voted the wrong way on the important vote, which was cloture, and then tried to appease them by voting their way on the meaningless final vote whose outcome was assured. Doubt it’ll work for him. He’ll have to make it up to them somehow.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

It’s really no surprise that Rand Paul voted to help obama here. Lately, Paul has been trying to convince conservatives and Republiacns that he supports a strong U.S. military and views Israel as an important ally, but, his vote today proves otherwise.

Siding with obama and voting in favor of Hagel is a shocking act of TREASON that will weaken our national security, allow obama to gut our military and abandon our relationship with Israel. Rand Paul has sided with the enemy – this is unforgivable.

So, how long before Paul abandons this little pledge …

(Feb 21) Yesterday I issued my final letter to Brennan. I intend to filibuster his nomination if this letter goes unanswered.

Rand Paul is shameless. A total embarrassment. He’s clueless if he thinks his meaningless symbolic vote that changes absolutely nothing is going to buy him a dime’s worth of grace from the libertarians he’s been pissing on throughout this debacle.

The nut doesn’t fall far from the tree. I see that Rand Paul is as Israel hating as his nutjob father, and voted for Hagel.

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on February 26, 2013 at 6:45 PM

the Whaaambulance arrives right on cue. You’re like a liberal calling their opposition racist because they oppose Obama. Rand told everyone ahead of time that when it comes down to it, the President gets to pick his cabinet. Rand voted for Kerry as Sec of State. You were never a Rand Paul guy so your opinion here is not a surprise.

Who gives a crap anymore? The more Obama gets his way, the faster this whole ride comes crashing down. Crash, burn, rebuild.

tdarrington on February 26, 2013 at 6:49 PM

I’m not saying you don’t have a point, but when a guy like Obama is never held accountable for anything, it doesn’t really matter whether or not everything crashes and burns, nor how long it takes.

The unemployment rate could skyrocket to 12%, the stock market could crash down to 8,000 and an American landmark could be attacked by terrorists, and Obama would still not be held accountable – for any of it.

A truly random man wouldn’t have earned the sturdy liberal support that Hagel’s Israel-focused Jew-baiting and left-of-Obama foreign policy brought him

If there was another election today, 70% of American Jews will vote Democratic, who are we kidding? Since they don’t care, I couldn’t care less. It seems to me just about every group has tuned the GOP out.
The GOP stands for absolutely nothing, if you are going to waste time and energy screaming that a guy is not qualified to run the world’s largest military, do something about it or shut the f@@k up.

we clearly disagree on his qualifications but this tantrum is unbecoming.

sesquipedalian on February 26, 2013 at 7:02 PM

What are his qualifications? Voting to invade Iraq, then against the surge? Opposing the sort of Iran sanctions that ended up being the cornerstone of Obama’s Iran policy? Calling for U.S.-led peacekeepers in the Palestinian territories?

His qualification is that he served honorably in the military. So did millions of other people.

Rand Paul is shameless. A total embarrassment. He’s clueless if he thinks his meaningless symbolic vote that changes absolutely nothing is going to buy him a dime’s worth of grace from the libertarians he’s been pissing on throughout this debacle.

Armin Tamzarian on February 26, 2013 at 7:01 PM

I think I somehow missed the reason why the libertarians are hell bent on confirming such a pitiful excuse for competence. This guy is a crap sandwich value meal. Why all the outrage at his no votes? I’m super pissed at him for voting yes. I’m from Lexington, KY and had such high hopes for this guy..

And honestly, if confirming someone like Hagel is what the libertarians want I guess this is a point where we part ways. I just can’t wrap my head around it.

Rand Paul is shameless. A total embarrassment. He’s clueless if he thinks his meaningless symbolic vote that changes absolutely nothing is going to buy him a dime’s worth of grace from the libertarians he’s been pissing on throughout this debacle.
Armin Tamzarian on February 26, 2013 at 7:01 PM

So commitment to ideology is more important than seeing an idiot as an idiot? Libertarians deserve their 1% vote share and nothing more.

What are his qualifications? Voting to invade Iraq, then against the surge? Opposing the sort of Iran sanctions that ended up being the cornerstone of Obama’s Iran policy? Calling for U.S.-led peacekeepers in the Palestinian territories?

His qualification is that he served honorably in the military. So did millions of other people.

Allahpundit on February 26, 2013 at 7:08 PM

two purple hearts, founded a successful company and served as president and ceo at others, served 2 term in the senate and sat on key committees including foreign relations and intel. teaches at georgetown. chairman of the atlantic council.

but, based on one hearing, blogger declares him an incompetent degenerate and reacts with incoherent rage when he’s confirmed. it’s really bizarre behavior.

Your basis for calling him an idiot is… what, exactly? A crappy confirmation hearing? Plenty of highly-qualified, smart people would choke during something like that.
Armin Tamzarian on February 26, 2013 at 7:19 PM

If he can’t be tasked to appear before the senate and honestly answer what his boss’ foreign policy is (or even do that before the press), and somehow you attribute that to “choking” then you fail basic PR. These Washington types are trained to look better. It’s all they live for for gods sake.

two purple hearts, founded a successful company and served as president and ceo at others, served 2 term in the senate and sat on key committees including foreign relations and intel. teaches at georgetown. chairman of the atlantic council.

but, based on one hearing, blogger declares him an incompetent degenerate and reacts with incoherent rage when he’s confirmed. it’s really bizarre behavior.

sesquipedalian on February 26, 2013 at 7:18 PM

Yet Chuck Schumer had to explain to him that the words he uttered were anti-semitic.

My mother moved left over the past few years of her life, but as far as I know-her last vote was a grudging vote for Mitt. My dad never voted for a dim in the general election. His first vote was for Goldwater.

If he can’t be tasked to appear before the senate and honestly answer what his boss’ foreign policy is (or even do that before the press), and somehow you attribute that to “choking” then you fail basic PR. These Washington types are trained to look better. It’s all they live for for gods sake.

nobar on February 26, 2013 at 7:24 PM

Maybe Chuck Hagel isn’t a “Washington type” then. Maybe he’s a good old, cornfed Nebraska boy with some common-sense, old school conservative ideas of foreign policy that have been almost eradicated entirely from the modern GOP after decades of utterly destructive neoconservative influence.

Chuck Hagel is the Washington outsider that conservatives claim to want. Instead, they reject him because he’s not establishment enough on certain issues.

two purple hearts, founded a successful company and served as president and ceo at others, served 2 term in the senate and sat on key committees including foreign relations and intel. teaches at georgetown. chairman of the atlantic council.

No Ronulan, we’re rejecting him because he’s incompetent and hates Jooos.

annoyinglittletwerp on February 26, 2013 at 7:31 PM

Even though there’s not a single piece of evidence that Chuck Hagel is even remotely antisemitic or harbors any prejudice or hatred towards Jews whatsoever, let’s just assume that this is the case for a second. Who cares? What relevance does that have to the position of defense secretary? I wonder why his other personal beliefs–some of which I strongly disagree with–haven’t been put under the same microscope that his supposed “antisemitism” has.

two purple hearts, founded a successful company and served as president and ceo at others, served 2 term in the senate and sat on key committees including foreign relations and intel. teaches at georgetown. chairman of the atlantic council.

but, based on one hearing, blogger declares him an incompetent degenerate and reacts with incoherent rage when he’s confirmed. it’s really bizarre behavior.

sesquipedalian on February 26, 2013 at 7:18 PM

Gotta love the hypocrisy of you effing sheeple. You spit on the military until it serves your purposes and then all of a sudden it is relevant. Here’s a clue for you chump that is a civilian post not a military one. Even your own dimoturds were not especially impressed with Hagel.

Anyone with half a lick of sense knows why you and your fellow hateful sheeple love this clown it’s only because your moronic presidope put him up for the post. If Bush would have put someone like this up you and your pathetic kind would have been screaming all over the place about what an idiot Bush was for putting a clown like Hagel up and how unqualified he is.

two purple hearts, founded a successful company and served as president and ceo at others, served 2 term in the senate and sat on key committees including foreign relations and intel. teaches at georgetown. chairman of the atlantic council.

sesquipedalian on February 26, 2013 at 7:18 PM

Based on that, you would think that he would have done better at that “one hearing”. If he can’t be bothered to prepare for that, why would he do any better in the actual position?

But anyway, the only real qualification he has that you care about is how useful he is to poke us in the eye.

Heck, it COULD have been a “random guy” and you would be all for it, only because it would have raised our hackles.

Based on that, you would think that he would have done better at that “one hearing”. If he can’t be bothered to prepare for that, why would he do any better in the actual position?

But anyway, the only real qualification he has that you care about is how useful he is to poke us in the eye.

Heck, it COULD have been a “random guy” and you would be all for it, only because it would have raised our hackles.

Jeff Weimer on February 26, 2013 at 7:41 PM

That all depends on whether or not said “random guy” has ever said anything, in his life, that could be construed as unsupportive of Israel. For some reason, that is the exclusive litmus test many “conservatives” have for potential defense and foreign policy officials.

14 June 1940: The Nazis triumphantly march down the Avenue des Champs-Élysées.

22 June 1940: In the very same railway carriage in which the 1918 Armistice was signed and in the same chair in which Marshal Ferdinand Foch had sat when he faced the defeated German representatives, Hitler watched General Charles Huntziger sign the Second Armistice at Compiègne.

23 June 1940: Hitler and his entourage go sightseeing through Paris.

45 days.
.
.31 January 2013: Bags Hagel bombed in his Senate hearing.

26 February 2013: The victors sign unconditional surrender documents on the USS Obama.